首页> 外文学位 >Derrida or Lacan: The revolutionary's choice on the 'plural logic of the aporia' in deconstruction and Lacanian psychoanalysis.
【24h】

Derrida or Lacan: The revolutionary's choice on the 'plural logic of the aporia' in deconstruction and Lacanian psychoanalysis.

机译:德里达或拉康:在解构和拉康精神分析中,革命者对“阿波利亚的复数逻辑”的选择。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Derrida emphasizes a political obligation to confront Lacan's difficult thinking, since it rebels against normalization. Lacan in turn encourages such critical appropriation. Seemingly, tied together by mutual respect and resistance, it is fair to expect a dynamic interchange of ideas between Derrideans and Lacanians. Yet, for complex reasons, one is regularly confronted with mutual resentment and misconstruction and the interface between deconstruction and psychoanalysis risks becoming a limiting border rather than a permeable space of generative cross-fertilization.;Contrary to the adversarial trend in the Lacan/Derrida encounters, this study aims to justify the claim that the logical structure underpinning Lacanian psychoanalytic theory is a complex, paradoxical relationality that precisely matches a key that Derrida offers for gaining access to his own quasi-transcendental thinking, namely the "plural logic of the aporia." Derrida here formalizes the strictures imposed by three forms of aporia; namely the economic, the aneconomic, and the aporia of the aporias, or the double bind that arises because the first two aporias are joined together as a paradox.;Lacan theorizes the subject-other relation as a plural structure consisting of three articulated subject-other complexes. In turn, he finds that all three complexes are split between opposing libidinal styles---associated with either side of the aporetic death drive, and divided along the lines of sexual difference---which one may call "masculine paranoia" and "feminine hysteria." He names the logic of their articulation the "vel of alienation." The Hegelian lose/lose proposed here is that in choosing one the other is lost; yet, because they are interdependent, this is also thereby to lose the original choice. Lacan, therefore, refuses the limitations of a choice between these related aporias and (as does Derrida) prefers a third stance, which invokes the figure of paradox. To establish an accord between these two thinkers on the basis of this logical match has the value of dismantling misconstructions on both sides, and opening the way to a more productive theoretical interchange between Derridean deconstruction and Lacanian psychoanalysis, the significance which is tied to the importance for dealing with practical issues in everyday life, claimed for both discourses.
机译:德里达强调反对拉康的艰难思想的政治义务,因为拉康反对正常化。拉康反过来鼓励这种批判性拨款。看起来,在相互尊重和抵制的共同作用下,可以期待德里德里安人与拉康人之间思想的动态交流。然而,由于复杂的原因,人们经常面临相互的怨恨和误解,解构主义与精神分析之间的交界可能成为限制性边界,而不是生成性交叉受精的可渗透空间。与拉康/德里达遭遇的对抗趋势相反,这项研究旨在证明拉康主义精神分析理论的逻辑结构是一个复杂的,悖论的关系,正好与德里达提供的一种获得他自己的准先验思想的途径即“阿波利亚的复数逻辑”相匹配。 ”德里达在这里正式确定了三种形式的阿片症所引起的狭窄。即经济性,非经济性和无视症的无视症,或由于前两个无视症以悖论结合在一起而产生的双重约束;拉康理论将主语-其他关系理论化为由三个关节状语组成的复数结构,其他复合体。反过来,他发现所有这三种复合物都在相对的性欲风格之间分裂(与无源死亡驱动力的任一侧相关联,并且沿着性别差异而划分),这可以被称为“男性妄想症”和“女性化”。歇斯底里。”他将他们表达的逻辑命名为“疏远之风”。这里提出的黑格尔的输赢是,选择一个输了。然而,由于它们是相互依存的,因此这也将失去最初的选择。因此,拉康拒绝在这些相关的失语症之间做出选择的局限性(德里达也是如此)更喜欢第三种立场,这引起了悖论的出现。在这种逻辑匹配的基础上在这两个思想家之间达成和解的价值在于消除双方的误解,并为在德里达解构主义和拉康精神分析之间更富有成效的理论交流开辟道路,其重要性与重要性息息相关。处理日常生活中的实际问题,两种话语都宣称。

著录项

  • 作者

    Hurst, Andrea.;

  • 作者单位

    Villanova University.;

  • 授予单位 Villanova University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Psychology Clinical.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2006
  • 页码 441 p.
  • 总页数 441
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:40:22

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号